|
|
| Author |
Message |
skawler
|
|
Seriously.
| 
Mar 3 15:40 UTC 2005 |
I posted a copy in some other item, but recently Steve' ANdre sent an E-mail
to Gmail stating something to the effect that I had used their service to
impersonate Grex's staff.
This has since been shown to be false. The impersonator was, in fact,
hayz3141.
Of course, some people confuse hayz3141 with me. However, even Eric Bassey,
my staunchest persecutor, agrees that there is REASONABLE DOUBT and NO SOLID
EVIDENCE that we are the same person. The E-mail Steve' sent, on the other
hand, was worded in such a way that anyone would think Steve' KNEW or at least
THOUGHT he knew we were one.
To-day, my account has been killed.
This, it seems to me, is an absolute abuse of staff's powers. Steve'
lied about me and, because of this, I lost something that was quite useful
and IMPORTANT to me.
He ought to apologize.
|
| 35 responses total. |
scholar
|
|
response 1 of 35:
|
Mar 3 15:46 UTC 2005 |
This response has been erased.
|
skawler
|
|
response 2 of 35:
|
Mar 3 15:50 UTC 2005 |
(on a more personal note:
i've been having a terrible time lately. as has been discussed in other
items, i have various mental ISSUES, and have been having a TOUGH TIME
getting
any enjoyment out of life recently. indeed, i've been mostly absolutely
miserable and have had trouble even being COMFORTABLE in my own skin as
it were. my gmail account had imporant e-mails in it, including ones
from PEOPLE I LOVE AND WHO MAKE ME A BIT LESS MISERABLE, and these are
now probably irrecoverable. to lose this in my present state,
especially for absolutely no reason at all, SUCKS.)
|
micklpkl
|
|
response 3 of 35:
|
Mar 3 16:38 UTC 2005 |
pity, really.
|
naftee
|
|
response 4 of 35:
|
Mar 3 16:47 UTC 2005 |
A sad, tall tale.
|
aruba
|
|
response 5 of 35:
|
Mar 3 17:35 UTC 2005 |
David - I'm sorry you are having a tough time. I suggest going to the
psychological counseling service at your university. I'm afraid you long
ago used up any well of sympathy on Grex.
|
twenex
|
|
response 6 of 35:
|
Mar 3 18:07 UTC 2005 |
Actually, from #5 it doesn't sound like he has. Though of course it's
possible that you're the only one who can muster any.
|
scholar
|
|
response 7 of 35:
|
Mar 3 18:22 UTC 2005 |
Re. 5: I've already done that, thanks, but let's concentrate on the issue
at hand, to wit, staff abusing its position of responsibility (and therefore
assumed respectability) to slander users it dislikes.
|
naftee
|
|
response 8 of 35:
|
Mar 3 19:00 UTC 2005 |
Yeah ! Response #5 is a kind of a neat paradox !
|
albaugh
|
|
response 9 of 35:
|
Mar 3 19:31 UTC 2005 |
Steve is indeed sorry - he is sorry he has to spend time dealing with system
twerps.
|
other
|
|
response 10 of 35:
|
Mar 3 19:40 UTC 2005 |
All I have to say on the subject is that it is about time some people
learned the using the Internet to be a sociopath does not shield you
from the consequences of your sociopathy.
|
scholar
|
|
response 11 of 35:
|
Mar 3 20:01 UTC 2005 |
Yet more libels from yet more of my persecutors.
I will respond to them individually, though it's questionable what the
efficacy of such treatment will be when one considers the highly organized
and collective nature of these villains/kerls.
Re. 9: Calling me a twerp is what philosophers know as a Red Herring Fallacy.
What could me being a twerp possibly have to do with Steve' slandering me in
an attempt to make it impossible for me to maintain my already limited social
network? (As Steve' well knew when he sent the E-mail, the freezing of my
account now means I have irrecoverably lost several very important E-mail
addresses and E-mails. This is an attempt on Steve''s part to drive me insane
by removing my methods of social contact. Keep in mind I have virtually no
social contact with people in person, due to various mental diseases, and that
killign my E-mail account has removed one of my limited sources of
support/camaraderie/companionship as well as EVIDENCE of SCC. It's basically
an attempt to destroy my identity).
Re. 10: Yet another name, yet another read response 9. (One wonders how
someone having a mental disorder (sociopathy, which has a very specific
definition that I don't fit whatsoever) could possibly be an excuse to lose
all precepts of justice. We know other reads lots of legal texts (we've seen
him quote from there before) and so we know he knows this is absolute bunk
in terms of any legal theory that has ever in the history of mankind been
promulgated, but this is just another indication that he's not serious in
attributing his persecution of me to this particular reason.
|
other
|
|
response 12 of 35:
|
Mar 3 20:41 UTC 2005 |
I'm using the word sociopathy in a descriptive and hyperbolic manner.
Yours is a behavioral or disciplinary disorder, and as such, suffering
the consequences of your actions is the best treatment.
|
scholar
|
|
response 13 of 35:
|
Mar 3 20:46 UTC 2005 |
My account was closed because (beconsequence) I impersonated Grex's staff.
Since I didn't do that, how could suffering the loss of my account (and my
social support structure) possibly be a consequence of my actions? Are you
suggesting there can be effects without causes? And, at that, effects that
can be attributed causally to certain people DESPITE TEHR EBEING NO CAUSES?!
This is whaqt Ckant was talking about when he said THJE METAPHYSICS OF MORALS,
and you trying to sneak around metaphysical boundaries doesn't help your case
(i.e. , that you'rre trying to hide the fact that you're boasting about trying
to destroy my social structures.).
|
tod
|
|
response 14 of 35:
|
Mar 3 20:47 UTC 2005 |
Consquences of what? STeve falsely advised Google.
|
other
|
|
response 15 of 35:
|
Mar 3 20:52 UTC 2005 |
Prove it. Basic behavioral patterns, numerous posts from a number of
accounts and possibly other evidence to which STeve may have had easier
access than I make for a very reasonable conclusion that those accounts
are held by the same person, and that is the person whose gmail account
was referenced.
In light of the past behavior of the user claiming to have been wronged,
he has used up any obligation of good faith owed him by staff, and if he
was wronged, then he should provide the reasonable proof of it. Short
of that, I am content to ignore his noise and hold any claims he makes
in utter contempt.
|
scholar
|
|
response 16 of 35:
|
Mar 3 20:54 UTC 2005 |
it should be noticed that if we're to have any SOLID< INTERNALIZED standard
of conduct, we have to go beyond a simple "actions->consequence" based
"morality". implicit in this idea is that you ought to do something based
simply on HOW IT BENEFITS OR HARMS YOUR PERSONAL INTERNALIZATION OF
BENEFITS/COSTS TO SELf. it doesn't say you OUGHT to do this, or this is more
ARTISTIC to do, or that you've AGREED to do this, but DO THIS BECAUSE YOU
WON"T BE HARMED AND DO THIS BECAUSE YOU WILL GET BENEFIT. This results in
COWARDICE (hiding things, doing thme just when you think you can get away with
it, etc.) and loses any indication of how one OUGHT TO slash the BEST MOST
SATISTFYING WAY.
basically, trher'e's nothing solid here.
|
scholar
|
|
response 17 of 35:
|
Mar 3 20:56 UTC 2005 |
Re. 15: people ought not be punished on SUSPICION alone. also, i can't help
but think your suggestion that i "prove it" is made with knowledge that the
suggestion is absurd. how exactly am i supposed to prove it? that would
certainly requre hayz's cooperation, and an effect of me NOT BEING HIM is
that i don't have easy access to that cooperation.
|
other
|
|
response 18 of 35:
|
Mar 3 20:59 UTC 2005 |
Noise, noise, noise. Grex is a community, and as such it is organic,
not static. When people work as hard as you have to break the system,
they can have no reasonable expectation that the system will not respond
in kind, no matter how highly principled its design and general intent.
You've tried to bend us over and ravage us every which way since you
first showed up here. Have a taste of your own stuff, and enjoy it,
with my compliments. (Doesn't feel as good to be the one under the gun,
does it?)
|
tod
|
|
response 19 of 35:
|
Mar 3 23:56 UTC 2005 |
You've tried to bend us over and ravage us every which way since you
first showed up here. Have a taste of your own stuff, and enjoy it,
with my compliments.
You pervert.
|
cross
|
|
response 20 of 35:
|
Mar 4 00:28 UTC 2005 |
Actually, I think he's probably thoroughly enjoying himself right now.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 21 of 35:
|
Mar 4 00:43 UTC 2005 |
Someone's squealing like a pig. I'm just not sure who . . . .
|
naftee
|
|
response 22 of 35:
|
Mar 4 01:00 UTC 2005 |
OTHER ! CAN I ENJOY IT WITH YOUR CONDOM_IMENTS ?
|
scholar
|
|
response 23 of 35:
|
Mar 4 01:13 UTC 2005 |
Look how other changes his position (quicker than Kerry, I might add).
First he started off by, uh, RADICAL SKEPTICISM: I BELIEVE< HE SAID< THAT
IT CANNNOT BE SHOWN THAT HAYZ AND SCHOLAR ARE DIFFERENT AND TEHREFORE THEY
MUST BE TREATED AS THE SAME> ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING HOW SCHOLAR HAS LIED
INSIMILAR INSTANCES IN THE PAST (WHICH *ISN"T* TRUE> If you look at it, the
only time I've DENIED being the cause of a problem I caused on Grex is when
I was trying to implicate jp2, but that's because it WOULDN"T HAVE WORKED if
I had fessed up (though I did anyway, as soon as I found out it wouldn't work
(*but for other erasons)))
|
scholar
|
|
response 24 of 35:
|
Mar 4 01:14 UTC 2005 |
NOW, other's claiming that he thinks it's okay BECAUSE I've been unjust to
Grex and so I ought to be unjust doned to.
This is a TOITALLY different position than what he had before, though of
courzse both have the same awful result.
|